Does FoCal work

I'm wondering if I should invest in this? has anyone here tired it and liked it. I am from Canada, I don't know the price.

anitaw2 wrote in post #18541254
I'm wondering if I should invest in this? has anyone here tired it and liked it. I am from Canada, I don't know the price.

You can get the price from the FoCal web site.
https://www.reikanfoca​l.com/

I have not used it, but noticed that it gets good reviews. You can use Dot-Tune. It is also effective, and costs nothing. It's what I use.
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=7zE50jCUPhM
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11872​47/0

Ditto with Dot tune.

Yes, it works. I have been using FoCal for about 6 years. I find that it works great with my Canon lenses and bodies and it makes a difference in my photos. It is the first thing I do when I get a new piece of equipment.

Older versions of the software were less stable and tended to crash some but still worked. Newer versions are stable and have streamlined the analysis so it goes fairly quickly per lens/body adjustment.

If you have newer Canon equipment you have to manually make the adjustments to the body through the analysis but the software very clearly leads you through the process. I believe that with Nikon equipment the process is fully automatic like it was when I had a Canon 5D MkII body. Apparently, Canon eliminated some control from their API in more recent bodies.

One tip for best results is that you need a lot of light on the target. You need to be getting decent shutter speeds (at least appropriate for the lens you are testing) with the ISO at 200 and the aperture at wide open which can be a problem with long lenses + TC's.

I just got a 5D MkIV body last week and adjusted all my L lenses including my long lenses with TC's on the new body. I think the largest adjustment range was from -1 to +10 depending on the combo. None ended up needing 0 adjustment.

In my opinion, FoCal is worth the cost and I would highly recommend doing a MFA on all body/lens combinations in order to get the absolute best out of them.

I could not get dot tune to work, I am sure it works. I ended up getting a SpyderLENSCAL for really cheap. It is still a manual process but had better results.

I had Focus Tune, but results were inconsistent.

Now I find optimal AF Microadjustment manually (as advised by Canon), shooting a Siemens star to make the evaluation of achieved sharpness more accurate.

Archibald wrote in post #18541296
You can get the price from the FoCal web site.
https://www.reikanfoca​l.com/

I have not used it, but noticed that it gets good reviews. You can use Dot-Tune. It is also effective, and costs nothing. It's what I use.
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=7zE50jCUPhM
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11872​47/0

I just watched the video and printed the target. did everything he said and it was a total failure. I went 0,green dot focused, went -20, green dot focused, went +20, green dot focused. didn't matter what value I put, green dot focused. I did notice on the weekend that the lens focuses great on close objects but when my daughter went farther than 20 feet, the lens always missed focus by a lot/or picture was very soft

agedbriar wrote in post #18541568
I had Focus Tune, but results were inconsistent.

Now I find optimal AF Microadjustment manually (as advised by Canon), shooting a Siemens star to make the evaluation of achieved sharpness more accurate.

Hosted photo: posted by agedbriar in
./showthread.php?p=185​41568&i=i153825360
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

how does this work?

anitaw2 wrote in post #18541741
I just watched the video and printed the target. did everything he said and it was a total failure. I went 0,green dot focused, went -20, green dot focused, went +20, green dot focused. didn't matter what value I put, green dot focused. I did notice on the weekend that the lens focuses great on close objects but when my daughter went farther than 20 feet, the lens always missed focus by a lot/or picture was very soft

What lens?

anitaw2 wrote in post #18541741
I just watched the video and printed the target. did everything he said and it was a total failure. I went 0,green dot focused, went -20, green dot focused, went +20, green dot focused. didn't matter what value I put, green dot focused. I did notice on the weekend that the lens focuses great on close objects but when my daughter went farther than 20 feet, the lens always missed focus by a lot/or picture was very soft

Are you sure you locked in the focus adjustment as you were trying DotTune? On Canon, it takes a click of the set button to lock the new setting in. + or - 20 certainly makes a big difference and should affect the focus confirmation dot.

Archibald wrote in post #18541763
What lens?

85mm f1.8

FOcal works great! If you want a scientific/statistical approach to MFA, it's the way to go.

agedbriar wrote in post #18541568
I had Focus Tune, but results were inconsistent.

Now I find optimal AF Microadjustment manually (as advised by Canon), shooting a Siemens star to make the evaluation of achieved sharpness more accurate.

Hosted photo: posted by agedbriar in
./showthread.php?p=185​41568&i=i153825360
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

I always preferred the ISO12233 chart. Same idea but a little easier to tell what you really have.

anitaw2 wrote in post #18541744
how does this work?

You shoot that target at different AF MA settings and compare the images: the image with the smallest blurred area around the center is the sharpest.

The Siemens star target allows a more accurate comparison of sharpness across various images (MA settings) than the classic "brick wall shots" would.

ok, I tried Dot Tune this morning. Put it on ManFoc, micro focus to "0", got the target to focus correctly. Then put it on -10, no focus; put it on "0 again, focused; put it on +5, got focus; put it on +10, got focus; +15, focus; +20, focus... now isn't it suppose to stop focusing as I change the Micro adj.?